Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?)
От
Fabien COELHO
Тема
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?)
Дата
Msg-id
alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2106190651240.3211875@pseudo
Ответ на
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Sergei Kornilov <sk@zsrv.org>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
Re: Failures with gcd functions with GCC snapshots GCC and -O3 (?) Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
>>> There was a silent API breakage (same API, different behavior, how nice…) >>> in llvm main that Andres figured out, which will have to be fixed at some >>> point, so this is reminder that it is still a todo… >> >> If it were *our* todo, that would be one thing; but it isn't. > > Over on the other thread[1] we learned that this is an API change > affecting reference counting semantics[2], so unless there is some > discussion somewhere about reverting the LLVM change that I'm unaware > of, I'm guessing we're going to need to change our code sooner or > later. Indeed, I'm afraid the solution will have to be on pg side. > I have a bleeding edge LLVM on my dev machine, and I'm willing to try to > reproduce the crash and write the trivial patch (that is, figure out the > right preprocessor incantation to detect the version or feature, and > bump the reference count as appropriate), if Andres and/or Fabien aren't > already on the case. I'm not in the case, I'm only the one running the farm animal which barks too annoyingly for Tom. -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
От: Julien Rouhaud
Дата: